On the morning of July 15, France won the 2018 World Cup in Moscow, Russia. The predominantly black team (80 percent have African roots) was celebrated by fans from all around the globe, including  Daily Show host Trevor Noah. “Africa won the World Cup!” Noah cheered as the audience roared into applause. The French, however, weren’t so pleased. French ambassador, Gerard Araud, responded to the comment with a letter defending the Frenchness of the players of African descent. “This, even in jest, legitimizes the ideology which claims whiteness as the only definition of being French,” Araud wrote. That same night, Noah defended his joke with a monologue arguing that he was celebrating their roots rather than undermining their nationality.

People on social media chimed in with comments and tweets either defending or expressing  disappointment in Noah. This division wasn’t caused only by the joke. In fact, it reflects the stark difference between French and American liberal views on race, identity and diversity.

It came as a shock to me when French people of African descent were comparing Noah’s comment with conservative French political philosophy. So, I started looking into how it all began: French assimilation strategies versus American identity politics.

After studying in the US for about a year, I quickly came to realize how ethnic roots and religious beliefs have a valuable place in individual identities. Especially on Whitman’s campus, I see a lot of students celebrating their identities, fighting for the voices of marginalized groups and creating close communities through IC clubs, P&P talks and other events. Such unity seems vital at a time when the nation’s president is openly racist and makes minority groups feel unsafe in their own country.

On the other hand, France has a unique method for dealing with race issues. Their aggressive assimilation tactics started when France was hit with a wave of immigrants from their colonies. In an effort to preserve their language and culture, France established strict citizenship requirements. Applicants had to learn French and the country’s customs. This explains what Araud meant when he wrote in his letter: “unlike in the United States of America, France does not refer to its citizens based on their race, religion, or origin. To us, there is no hyphenated identity, roots are an individual reality.” The letter shares the values of most French liberal politicians: every citizen is French no matter where you are from, end of the story.

Unfortunately, the conservative side in France doesn’t agree. They believe that Frenchness necessitates white skin and European ancestry. Immigrants are constantly attacked for not originating from France and are told they don’t belong. That’s where Trevor Noah struck a chord. Conservative people in France would agree that it was, in fact, an African victory, because the team was 80 percent black. Even if Noah’s intention wasn’t to attack their French identity, it is a sensitive issue for French citizens of African descent.

Is Noah’s approach correct? I am not in a position to decide, but I do have an opinion.

If you claimed to be color blind, I’d call you out for your ignorance. However, in a perfect world, France’s color-blind liberalism actually seems like the way to go. While your roots are still part of your identity, holding your nationality to a higher value would create a stronger sense of national unity. But then again, that would only be successful if every single person accepted the fact that all citizens are equally important and nobody had any racist opinions. Since that is unlikely to ever happen, I don’t believe France is right to strive for this utopian ideology.